HFpapi
Registered User
I'll try to better articulate the premise of the thread:
My "era" aka when I transitioned from mere fan of the sport of hockey to being an avid and obsessive watcher/consumer of NHL hockey was very early 2000's age 10/11ish. Salt Lake Olympics, Leafs run to ECF in 2002 began it. As such, there's a lot of guys from that time and into the mid/late 2000's that I watched and know were spectacular players but there won't be much evidence of it as time goes on.
What do I mean by evidence? Their careers weren't super long and/or storied, no major individual awards, stats aren't eye-popping and don't tell their entire story.
What guys from your era (especially interested to hear from people who watched 70's-early 90's) that are really good players but fans of today would have no idea without "being there."
Some guys I think of off the top of my head:
Mike Richards: Pretty short career in the end, only two really good offensive years of 75 & 80 points (and even then, those were elite offensive years for the era but don't look like much with todays scoring renaissance) but man was he special. Kids picking up the sport 15-20 years from now who come across his stats will never know.
Could get on the score sheet but would be valuable with zero points. Wrecking ball on the ice, ball of energy, physical, could shut down and neutralize other teams top C's, hard on the forecheck. hard on the back check, great on faceoffs, great efforts in the defensive end. Was part of one of Canada's most effective lines ever with Toews & Nash and even when his offensive numbers declined he was a massive part of LA's cup runs.
Todd Bertuzzi: Yeah we all know he was really dominant before the Moore incident derailed his career but even fans now too young to have actually watched him and especially so in the future might not grasp exactly how good.
2001-2004 was an offensive blackhole so 85 & 97 point seasons are so much better than they even look. Had he not been suspended 10 games in 01/02 very possibly would've nabbed the Art Ross while being the most impressive physical specimen in the league. Huge, mean, drove to the net with defenders draped over him, one-hand on stick one stiff arming, silky hands, not just for a big man, just period. Great shot. If he could've sustained his two-year peak level for 6-8 years he'd be an all-time great player.
Ziggy Palffy: Again, the trend here, by todays standards and probably same is true in the future, sandwiched between the high scoring 70's-early 90's and todays high scoring era, Palffy being able to consistently score 40+ goals and 80+ points in his sleep will not look as impressive as it really was. Retired out of nowhere during a PPG season and never known to be a hard worker, this guy was so smooth on the ice and was absurdly naturally gifted. Hockey came easily to him.
Maybe even more obsure guys who won't get the respect they deserve like Kimmo Timonen, Darian Hatcher, Petr Nedved etc.
From the 80's maybe guys like Hakan Loob, Tim Kerr etc.
I could go on and on but I'll open the floor.
My "era" aka when I transitioned from mere fan of the sport of hockey to being an avid and obsessive watcher/consumer of NHL hockey was very early 2000's age 10/11ish. Salt Lake Olympics, Leafs run to ECF in 2002 began it. As such, there's a lot of guys from that time and into the mid/late 2000's that I watched and know were spectacular players but there won't be much evidence of it as time goes on.
What do I mean by evidence? Their careers weren't super long and/or storied, no major individual awards, stats aren't eye-popping and don't tell their entire story.
What guys from your era (especially interested to hear from people who watched 70's-early 90's) that are really good players but fans of today would have no idea without "being there."
Some guys I think of off the top of my head:
Mike Richards: Pretty short career in the end, only two really good offensive years of 75 & 80 points (and even then, those were elite offensive years for the era but don't look like much with todays scoring renaissance) but man was he special. Kids picking up the sport 15-20 years from now who come across his stats will never know.
Could get on the score sheet but would be valuable with zero points. Wrecking ball on the ice, ball of energy, physical, could shut down and neutralize other teams top C's, hard on the forecheck. hard on the back check, great on faceoffs, great efforts in the defensive end. Was part of one of Canada's most effective lines ever with Toews & Nash and even when his offensive numbers declined he was a massive part of LA's cup runs.
Todd Bertuzzi: Yeah we all know he was really dominant before the Moore incident derailed his career but even fans now too young to have actually watched him and especially so in the future might not grasp exactly how good.
2001-2004 was an offensive blackhole so 85 & 97 point seasons are so much better than they even look. Had he not been suspended 10 games in 01/02 very possibly would've nabbed the Art Ross while being the most impressive physical specimen in the league. Huge, mean, drove to the net with defenders draped over him, one-hand on stick one stiff arming, silky hands, not just for a big man, just period. Great shot. If he could've sustained his two-year peak level for 6-8 years he'd be an all-time great player.
Ziggy Palffy: Again, the trend here, by todays standards and probably same is true in the future, sandwiched between the high scoring 70's-early 90's and todays high scoring era, Palffy being able to consistently score 40+ goals and 80+ points in his sleep will not look as impressive as it really was. Retired out of nowhere during a PPG season and never known to be a hard worker, this guy was so smooth on the ice and was absurdly naturally gifted. Hockey came easily to him.
Maybe even more obsure guys who won't get the respect they deserve like Kimmo Timonen, Darian Hatcher, Petr Nedved etc.
From the 80's maybe guys like Hakan Loob, Tim Kerr etc.
I could go on and on but I'll open the floor.
